Use the "back" button of your browser to return to the list of abstracts.
[PANEL] 0211 TRADITIONAL BUILDING TECHNOLOGY AND COMPARISON WITH ABROAD
Keita AOSHIMA, Shibaura Institute of Technology, Tokyo University of Science, Japan
ABINET Shiferaw; Bar KRIBUS; Keita AOSHIMA; Nobuhiro SHIMIZU; EYOEL Guush Gebrewold;
MUBAREK Kedir; Ryo HIGUCHI
In Ethiopia, various traditional techniques and culture has been nurtured on building construction. Each regional society established the own building style in response to the climate, available materials, ethnic customs, lifestyle and so on. Building technology has been developed by the close relationship between natural environment and social demand with local wisdom and experiences. However, recent radical change along with modernization and globalization has started to affect the treatment, role, and ability of the traditional technique. In this panel, the topics on the spacious range of aspects of the traditional building technology, such as construction method, tools and materials, building comfortability, planning, planning, and transformation (including improvement / deterioration) of the above, are invited. Report of the practical activities or comparative study with other or inner regions, or abroad is also welcomed.
ASPECTS AND DYNAMICS OF 'JAFORO' AS INDIGENOUS SYSTEM OF ARCHITECTURE AND CULTURAL SPACE IN GURAGE [Abstract ID: 0211-01]
The paper explores aspects and dynamics of 'Jaforo' as an indigenous architecture and cultural space of Gurage peoples. The objective was to investigate features, roles, and status of Jaforo as a system of indigenous architecture in the area of settlement and village road networks and cultural space. A qualitative approach was used to generate and analyze. Key informant interview, group discussion, observation, and sketching were used as sources of data. Four districts of Sebat bête Gurage (Cheha, Ezha, Gumer, and Enemorener) were places of data collection. Jaforo as a system of indigenous architecture and cultural place is evidence of long and well-done society-environment interaction. It has basic architectural manifestations together with multiple socio-economic and ecological purposes. It is a long-lived system of architecture in relation to settlement and village road networks and sources of livelihood and environment management practice protected by customary rules and regulations. Architecturally, it shapes settlement patterns, maintains a social network of villages, supports livelihood, and environmental management practices. Livelihoods wise, it facilitates villages' socio-economic activities like social support, cooperative works, market activities, farming and animal husbandry and efficient use of scarce natural resources. Culturally, it is a place for socio-cultural practices, leisure and emotional attachment for village community. Environmentally, it enables rotating uses of limited natural and agricultural resources. However, Jaforo has been facing increasing threats due to development intervention, land scarcity and growing overlook of culture among youth, encroachment of villages and increasing village transportation. The situations are affecting qualities and purposes of Jaforo as cultural landscape and indigenous knowledge system and posing questions on its continuity as knowledge system and survival strategy. So grassroots development approaches, alternative resource access systems, and awareness building need to be considered to safeguard and promote the tradition.
BETA ISRAEL MONASTIC PRAYER-HOUSE ARCHITECTURE: AN EXAMINATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL, TEXTUAL AND ETHNOGRAPHIC SOURCES [Abstract ID: 0211-09]
One of the most intriguing aspects of Beta Israel society is the existence of the Beta Israel monastic movement, and the central roles of the monks as leaders of the community and shapers of its religious life. Beta Israel monks observed strict purity laws, which necessitated physical separation from the laity. But, on the other hand, they offered the laity spiritual guidance, and served as teachers and leaders of the liturgy. Thus, they were required to come in constant contact with the lay community. The focal point of such contact was often the prayer-house compound. This paper will examine the architecture of Beta Israel prayer-house compounds, and the ways in which such compounds serving both a lay and a monastic community were designed to accommodate monastic requirements. This examination will be based on results of a recent archaeological survey of Beta Israel monastic sites (November 2017), as well as documented accounts of visits to Beta Israel villages and interviews with members of the Beta Israel community, and with former neighbors of the Beta Israel in Ethiopia. An attempt will be made to situate Beta Israel monastic prayer-house architecture within the context of general trends of prayer-house architecture in the northern Ethiopian Highlands, to pinpoint similarities and differences, and, through this examination, to shed further light on the characteristics of Beta Israel monasticism.
COMFORTABILITY OF TIGRAY TRADITIONAL HOUSE [Abstract ID: 0211-03]
The traditional house in Tigray region has unique building elements based on local materials and natural climate. However, those local technologies are decreasing and changed to modern style and materials. The thermal environment of house has been changed because of those new materials and lifestyle changes. The re-valuation and development of traditional technology is necessary to have enough comfortability of building and to develop sustainable design. To think of residential comfortability, temperature and humidity are most important factors. Architectural technology had been developed to control those factors especially in hard situated area like Japan.
To showing un-comfortability of house, we have to focus on thermal situation of wall and ceiling surface. Then, it is understood that several factors of modernized life change conditions of house.
DEMOCRACY OF IMAGERY, DOES MANY FACES IN ARCHITECTURE OF THE CITY DEMONSTRATE DEMOCRACY? [Abstract ID: 0211-08]
Cities are immediate representations of popular state of mind and ambition in many cases. The way they are planned, the architecture they offer and the infrastructure they possess are reflective of the direction our collective mind is taking as a result of individual and group aspirations. Starting from provision of guidelines up to the freedom to produce and put urban forms and architectural products in any place may start as something that won't have consequences but end up putting permanent image on the way we see, define and understand cities and the life they nurture. Here in Ethiopia in the rapid construction and urbanization that is taking place, the emergence of individual building forms in all cities irrespective of context. Unity and harmony calls for an immediate attention in how we can define and manage it. The individualistic approach to such representation also calls for whether democracy and freedom of expression has direct corelation to the decisions we make in this context.
SOME TOPICS TOWARDS A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF TIGRAY’S CROSS-IN-SQUARE:A WIDE-RANGING COMPARISON AMONG CHRISTIAN CROSS-IN-SQUARE CHURCHES [Abstract ID: 0211-02]
Cross-in-square structure in Tigray dates from the latter half of the first millennium or later; Ethiopian examples show a distinctive plan, which is related in certain points to buildings abroad, such as those in Greater Syria (e.g. Rusafa and Gerasa) and Armenian or Georgian churches in the Caucasus. The current study, however, casts doubt on any direct influence from those examples. 1) The decline of the Aksumite Empire and the surrender of Greater Syria and the Caucasus to the Islamic Empire from middle of 7th century onwards tended to prevent any direct ecclesiastic influence. Even if some Ethiopians visited those regions, cross-in-square buildings were not a popular building type, and most of them were probably already in ruins. Such visits could therefore not explain why they would choose to imitate this form. 2) Cross-in-square churches, with cruciform structures inscribed into rectangle plans, were distributed elsewhere in the Eastern Mediterranean and even as far West as France. However, these churches differed from those in Tigray, which emphasised transepts piercing two connected bays. It is noteworthy that Cappadocia, one of the densest areas of rock-hewn churches in the Byzantine Empire and close to possible influences from Syria and the Caucasus, has no such church plans. Tigray’s cross-in-square is reminiscent of the domed basilicas pervasive in early Christian times, including those in Egypt. 3) Tigray’s cross-in-square’s centre bay has a flattened ceiling with a curved cross; the ceilings of the cruciform arms are the same height as the centre bay; and domes are only used on the sanctuary. This contrasts with cross-in-square schemes elsewhere, which the centre bay is crowned with a dome at its highest point, and the four arms of the cross are vaulted below the dome. These do not mean, of course, that earlier churches in Tigray, like the one in Zarema, were not influenced from abroad. However, development within Ethiopia seems to be more important factor. Tigray’s cross-in-square should be compared with the other rock-hewn and masonry cross-in-square churches based on the point Christian churches in the several areas moved in parallel towards cross-in-square structures.